"I know your thoughts. Yes, I do. I know all of your
concerns - with Ron Paul, that is. He is nutty, a kook. He is an isolationist.
He is all for weakening our military and our standing in the world. He projects
that the U.S. is responsible for 9/11, or at least in part. He is anti-Israel
and suggests America is not needed in Israel's affairs. He has some wacky ideas
about the gold standard and ending the Federal Reserve. He is unfashionable,
unmarketable and, well gosh, just downright unPresidential-looking.
I know all of these arguments and charges against
Dr. Paul. I know because I was there and in line with the rest of critics -
sometimes with a bullhorn. And, that was just a few weeks ago.
But then, something happened. Herman Cain was
discredited and dropped from the race, rightly or wrongly, and, while I did not
fully support Cain, I elected to take another look at all of the candidates. I
took my time and began a process of elimination. The project was to analyze and
evaluate each and every candidate in the Republican field for President of the
United States. The task before me was one that also caused some self-reflection
on my part. Wow, was I ever grateful for embarking upon such an expedition.
You see unlike ALL of the other candidates, Ron Paul
hasn't crafted a plan for this campaign in just the past few months or sought to
paint himself as a certain breed of conservative. His plan and ideas have been
around for decades. It is genuine constitutional conservatism. The kind found in
some old historical books written by Newt Gingrich. (You know, the kind that
Newt has been attempting, with miserable success, to live up to.) The kind that
seeks to protect and preserve individual liberty. That same liberty that so
inspired our founders. And this is the core of who Ron Paul is and his message
remains consistent, timeless unlike all of the other candidates and politicians
who are typically strategic in their agendas and messaging.
In 1976, Paul was one of four congressman who stood
with and endorsed Ronald Reagan - another staunch conservative firebrand - while
all others supported Ford. What does that say about the man today? I don't know
but perhaps, just perhaps, it is just another clear indication of his core
values and how long he has remained consistent and unwavering in his devotion to
our founding constitutional principles. Again, unlike any other candidate. Oh,
and let's not forget, or in case you never knew, Ron Paul IS the only candidate
in this race who was ever endorsed BY Ronald Reagan. Not a bad bullet item to
add to a candidate's credentials from another candidate that the establishment
once labeled a "kook". Sound familiar?
So let's get to some basics here. You know, like
preserving the country that we all love. Now I love Paul Ryan. I am one of his
biggest fans. His Path To Prosperity proposal is impressive. He cuts $1 trillion
in spending in ten years. Ron Paul's plan does this in ONE year. If I can borrow
from Obama, sans the condescension, Make No Mistake, no politician, no think
tank, nobody comes close to Dr. Paul when it comes to fiscal policy for the sake
of saving our nation. All the rest are pretenders. Sure they talk a good game,
or at least for the moment, but that is the point. It is all just rhetoric and
only at a time when it matters - the Republican primary season. And, as Ron Paul
has said many times, the national debt is our biggest national security issue.
Period. If you think otherwise, then I have some solar energy stock to sell
you.
So many wisely proclaim their admiration for Ron
Paul's domestic policies. Once again, no candidate comes close to his policies
or his principles of fiscal responsibility. And no one has gone as far as
eliminating whole federal agencies.
Oh, and just who do you think pretty much coined the
phrase "Audit the Fed" and fought tooth and nail to get such legislation enacted
to (gulp) audit our own federal central bank? What a concept! He wants to do
more than that. He wants to END the Fed. That is beyond Reagan. That is
revolutionary. Again, NO other candidate can offer such an accomplishment - a
true quest for protecting the hard-earned capital of honest working
Americans.
And, let's not forget his anti-tax, anti-IRS
positions that Dr. Paul has held for years and well before the birth of any TEA
Party. His title as the father of the TEA Party is well-earned and reserved for
him and no one else. Further, the National Taxpayer's Union called him the
Taxpayer's Best Friend and he was endorsed by Milton Friedman. Quite impressive,
one must admit.
Now let's get to the more recent or common
allegations about Paul. First, he is anti-Israel. Again, I would have pushed and
shoved my way to the front of the pack to shout this critique. But, upon closer
examination, you cannot discount his consistency when it comes to protecting
personal liberty and preserving a nation's sovereignty. Dictating foreign policy
for another nation projects the height of arrogance and is just as senseless as
dictating to our very own citizens what light bulb is required for the sake of
allegedly protecting some penguins or polar bears.
Do you really believe that Israel is not strong
enough militarily to defend herself from her enemies that surround her? I
believe that Israel is more than capable of defending herself - and then some.
She has done it before and Israel will likely do it again. Benjamin Netenyahu
offered such a proclamation to our Congress just this past May! And, I have no
doubt that our alliance with Israel would only grow stronger as we respect their
freedom to make their own decisions - for good or for ill. It is not unlike the
conservative value of respecting an individual's ability to make a life of their
own, with their own efforts and WITHOUT the government's, or tax-payers'
assistance. That is empowering for an individual and a nation!
I agree with Dr. Paul that we should support Israel
as our most trusted ally in the Middle East. We should also seek to make sure
that alliance is understood in clear and concise terms by any enemy that would
seek to harm Israel. Further, many in Israel's own government have been shouting
for years that Israel, not the United States, should exercise their sovereignty
and defend themselves - all by themselves. As Ron Paul and many Jews have
stated, Zionism has two core values: Jewish Independence and Jewish
self-reliance. And, just who was it back in 1981 that went against the United
Nations, the US Congress and RONALD REAGAN himself and DEFENDED Israel's bombing
of an Iraqi nuclear plant? Santorum? Romney? Gingrich? It was Ron Paul and it
represents the MOST pro-Israel position of ANY candidate.
Moreover, could any American outside the walls of
MSNBC imagine another nation placing any sort of mandates upon the United States
for one reason or another? Then again, the United Nations is already doing this.
But that is another matter. And yet, NO candidate, no politician, no one is a
bigger defender of America's sovereignty and renouncing the United Nations as
Ron Paul. Again, no one. He has introduced and re-introduced legislation to end
US membership in the United Nations for years. So I ask, does anyone else have
such a self-protection position of preserving America's interests and
sovereignty on their resumes? This is getting kind of exhausting but NO!
Dictating foreign policy for other nations is just
like our welfare system where the government proclaims that people are too
stupid or unable to take care of themselves or even take responsibility for
their own actions. It should ring true for Israel and, likewise, it should ring
true for Iran. Guess I just drifted into that other hot button issue that has so
many worried about Paul - like I worried just mere weeks ago. Yes, Iran has
pledged time after time to wipe Israel off the map. This is true and the source
of my primary opposition to Ron Paul for years. Yet, do you honestly believe
that it will get to that point? Do you honestly believe that if the intelligence
was legit and such a strike was imminent, that Israel, once again, like Iraq in
1981, would do what was necessary to defend herself?
An additional and obvious concern for most Americans
is the threat of terrorism. The attacks upon the U.S. on 9/11 were barbaric,
without question. Congressman Paul's assessment and revelation of blowback, as
highlighted by even the CIA, is very real. Unlike Dr. Paul, that is all I am
going to say on that issue. Some things are better left unsaid. I am going to
trust that many already understand the principle of unintended consequences. I
will say that if I ever saw a Russian or UN helmet on my property or anywhere in
the USA, you better believe that I would use any and all means necessary to
expel them. And so would you.
Some continue to argue that Dr. Paul is
anti-military or that he does not support our troops. Yet Ronald Reagan, in a
campaign ad FOR Ron Paul said, "Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders
fighting for a stronger national defense." Couple that endorsement back then
with the fact that Ron Paul's financial support among our military members
dwarfs the donations of all of the other candidates plus Obama's COMBINED!
There is absolutely nothing wrong with questioning
the value of maintaining our troops, employed by the American people, in so many
other nations. It certainly makes sense to pre-position troops for potential
scenarios but does deploying our troops all over make any sense strategically or
financially whatsoever? And how could you argue with a man who advises caution
when it comes to committing our men and women of the military to any conflict or
who just wants to make sure he asks all the right questions before such a
commitment is made? No other candidate or even Obama expresses such caution when
it comes to the lives of our military. Trust me, I was just as cavalier as the
other candidates only a few weeks ago and now, admittedly, I will say that Ron
Paul is a clear protector of the military husbands, wives, sons, daughters. He
is not an isolationist as many have espoused. Isolationism also infers cutting
trade with other countries. Paul often promotes friendly trade among nations. He
is, however, a non-interventionist. There is a difference.
The latest charge to arise is that Ron Paul is a
racist. Really? No candidate among the Republican hopefuls or even Obama himself
is more anti-discrimination and in favor of breaking the shackles of racist
liberal policies than Ron Paul. His opposition to the death penalty, especially
as it relates to the inequity of low income minorities that are convicted over
whites, is commendable. And, his promotion of individual liberty over
collectivism is the MOST anti-racist view of any of the candidates.
Then there is the drug issue. Ah yes, the
legalization of drugs. It is that other issue that so plagued my measure of
support for Congressman Paul. Just how could we even consider legalizing drugs?
Yet there continues to be growing support for legalizing some drugs for
medicinal purposes. Conversely, there are some, in Congress and in the Big
Pharma lobby, who advocate for making natural remedies and supplements, so vital
for the health and recovery of some people, illegal. Now what sense does that
make? Are we really considering criminalizing a person for taking Fish Oil or a
Flintstones chewable? Think about it. And, what has the war on drugs really
accomplished, as Dr. Paul states? Further, why isn't alcohol - an indisputable
depressant - illegal? Oh wait, we tried that once. Once again, my position was
challenged by Dr. Paul as I pondered the correlation of increased liberty to
increased responsibility. Decriminalizing essentially a disease would likely
offer more help and motivation for an addict versus the stigma and alienation
that is now readily attached.
On social issues and, in particular, the Pro-life
cause, few candidates can match Paul's commitment to the unborn - a position he
has held for decades, unlike some of the other pretender candidates.
The final and most important issue that anyone
should have with any candidate is trustworthiness. How does a candidate measure
up against past decisions, proposed legislation, positions or actions? Who do
you or who can you trust in this field? Gingrich and Romney have both taken
flip-flopping to a new level. Huntsman was an Obama appointee. Enough said. Few
in public service can match Congressman Ron Paul for consistency and his
penchant for lifting his principles and the principles of every true
conservative over the pragmatics and compromise that infests the political
process. If you are like me, you are just as fed up with the pandering that
encourages so much deceit and corruption in politics. I am sick of hearing
simple phrases and promises from our supposed leaders who then rarely live up to
our expectations. That is not a concern of mine when it comes to Ron Paul and it
is exactly the reason that he is so feared among even his own party.
As mentioned, this has been a process for me. A long
process. I dragged myself kicking and screaming into this honest and real
re-evaluation of not only Ron Paul, but all of the other candidates. If you know
me then you know this is true. Again, just mere weeks ago I was probably his
biggest critic. Ron Paul is a true and genuine constitutional conservative of
Jefferson, Coolidge, Reagan and Goldwater. But don't take my word for it. Read
his info for yourself and without the filter of some biased source. Ron Paul had
been promoting and defending the Constitution before Newt trashed it, before
Romney violated it and well before the Tea Party rediscovered it.
Still perplexed, like the liberal media, by Ron
Paul's rise in popularity? His message and ideas are resonating with the voters
because they make sense. No further explanation is required.
So, if you really love liberty, the rule of law,
exercising the principles of fiscal responsibility, protecting America first and
traditional conservative values then, by definition, you - like the Gipper - are
a Ron Paul supporter. It is my hope that, like me, you will come to embrace this
as well. Do America a favor and take another look at Ron Paul. I did."
One reason this man's conversion is so important is
because he runs a consulting firm in the D.C. area that caters primarily to
Republicans.
Edit: He gave me permission to share his name: Victor Rogers
He will be reading these comments, so how about
welcoming him instead of doubting the story?